Harper v. Dawson
This text of 167 S.W. 311 (Harper v. Dawson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellee on the llth of April, 1911, brought suit in the justice’s court against appellant, where he recovered judgment from which an appeal was taken to the county court, where judgment also went in his favor, from which appellant prosecuted an appeal to this court, which was dismissed on motion of appellee for the reason that there was no final judgment entered in the county court. See Harper v. Dawson, 140 S. W. 385, for a full statement of the case.
On return of the mandate to the county court, appellee moved to dismiss the appeal *312 and withdraw the papers on the ground that no final Judgment had been entered in the justice’s court, which was granted. Thereafter, on the 10th of May, 1913, plaintiff in the justice’s court moved for trial, which was resisted by appellant on the ground that the case was not pending in that court. This objection was overruled, and the case tried on its merits before the court without a jury, resulting in a judgment in behalf of appellee, from which an appeal was taken to the county court. On trial in that court appellant in limine presented his plea in abatement, urging that this ease was not properly in the county court, for the reason that the same had been heretofore disposed of in that it had been dismissed both from the Court of Civil Appeals and the county court; but this plea was overruled and the case tried before the court without a jury, resulting in a judgment in behalf of appellee in the sum of $100.45, from which this appeal is prosecuted.
Finding no error in the proceedings of the trial court, its judgment is in all things affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
167 S.W. 311, 1914 Tex. App. LEXIS 528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harper-v-dawson-texapp-1914.